Beholding the glory of the Lord?

[jaydam]

2 Corinthians 3:18 - But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.

I've always been taught that this verse means a veil like a blindfold is removed from our eyes when we turn to Christ (v16). The removal of the veil allows us to look upon God's glory - or it opens our understanding.

One Bible college class I took went to far as to then talk about the mirrors of the Bible days, and how they were not clear like ours but were rather polished metal which did not offer clarity like modern mirrors. Thus, even with the veil lifted away, we look upon God's glory, but we see it poorly. Then, they go on to talk about how, as we study the glory of God which we can now see, it moves us into more and more glory - from glory to glory. Which ignores that glory in context is not the progression of the believer's life, but is the move from Mosaic Law to Christ's freedom... but that is a topic for another time...

Here is my problem as I'm going through this chapter for a new class. The veil removed from the believer's face seems to parallel the veil which was placed on Moses' face. The veil was not a blindfold of the one whose face was veiled, but was a concealer of God's glory emanating from the person. Thus, the removal of the blindfold is not to allow vision, but to allow God's glory to now shine forth from the unveiled person just as it did from Moses' face.

With this in mind, 2 Corinthians 3:18 should read something like - "But we all, with unveiled faces, mirroring/reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed..."

It would not appear we are gazing into a mirror upon the glory of the Lord, but we are the mirror/reflection of God's glory to those who look upon us.

Is there error in my understanding of this?

It does appear that veil is used in two manners: to speak of concealing the face which shines the glory of God, and to speak of clouding/closing the mind and heart.

However, for the believer, Paul does not say it is the veil over the mind and heart that is removed, but the one over the face, thus doesn't this relate it back to Moses' veil?

This would seem to go back to 2 Corinthians 3:12-13 where Paul's point is that we will be bold, unlike Moses who veiled his face. We have our faces unveiled, boldly allowing the new glory to shine forth from us.

Edit - Bottom line question: Are we gazing at a reflection of God's glory, or are we reflecting God's glory in this passage?

Popular opinion seems to be we are gazing at a reflection of God's glory.

[steve]

Good thoughts, Jay. I can't answer with certainty, but here are some ideas:

In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul seems to see the veil as concealing the glory of God reflected on Moses' face, thus blinding or obscuring onlookers' vision of what they would have seen with the veil removed. They were not wearing the veil, like a blindfold, but the veil worn by Moses stood between their eyes and the reflected glory on Moses' face—thus blinding them to it. They might as well have been wearing it, when it comes to their perception of the glory of God associated with the Old Covenant. The literal veil on his face, thus, corresponded to a metaphorical veil on their minds. From Moses' side of the veil, his appearance was hidden from viewers. From their side of the veil, they were blind to what he had seen and knew from God's revelation to him.

Having said that, I want to explore the meaning of the phrase, "we are being changed from glory to glory."

There seem to be two alternative ways of understanding this. One is the way that you suggested. Paul means that, in conversion, we have stepped out of the Old Covenant (and the fading glory associated with it) into the surpassing glory of the New Covenant. That is, we have exchanged one glory for another—the old for the new, the temporary for the enduring. This seems a possible meaning, in view of the fact that Paul has used the word "glorious" to speak of the Old Covenant and of the New Covenant (vv.7-8), and has contrasted the "glory" of the one with that of the other (v.9). Exchanging the glory of the former for the glory of the latter covenant would represent abandoning the Old Covenant and embracing the superior "glory" of the New.

This meaning would seem more likely, if it were the case that the Corinthians, prior to their conversion, had been Jews living under the Old Covenant. In reality, what they had actually exchanged was an inglorious paganism for the glorious gospel.

The other possible meaning is that Paul sees the glory experienced by the New Covenant believer as an ever-increasing "glory." As in Paul's illustration of Moses' face, "glory" is often likened to light or radiance, which is measured in degrees—diminishing, in the case of Moses' face (cf., 1 Cor.15:41). On this view, the phrase, "from glory to glory" would not mean a transfer "from the glory of one covenant to the glory of another," but progress from one degree of glory to another (higher) degree of glory, to be followed by yet another and another. A few considerations would favor this interpretation:

1) The wording. Paul does not say that the Corinthian Christians have previously (i.e., at conversion) substituted a previous glory for another, but that this is an ongoing transformation: ""We...are being changed from glory to glory." Also, it appears that the change is effected on the believer internally, not the mere imposition of a new covenant in place of an older one. The believer is "being metamorphosized." The same word is used of Christ at the transfiguration (Matt.17:2; Mark 9:2), and by Paul describing the transformation of the Christian through the renewing of the mind (Rom.12:2).

2) Context. Paul has pointed out that the inferior glory reflected on Moses face was a fading phenomenon (vv.11, 13). He seems, here (v.18), to be making the contrast in the fact that the New Covenant glory does not fade, but ever-increases upon the believer. Not only is the New Covenant more glorious than was the Old, but it is more permanently, and increasingly, glorious as well.

3) Pauline (and New Testament) usage, generally. It seems clear that Paul either identifies, or at least associates, the "glory" of the Lord with the "image" of Christ. "We all...beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed...into that same image." The juxtaposition of "glory" and "image" is notable elsewhere, as well (e.g., Heb.1:3; 1 Cor.11:7; 2 Cor.4:4). Where Hebrews 2:10 tells us that God's purpose is to "bring many sons to glory," the parallel statement, in Romans 8:29, speaks of the many brethren being "conformed to the image" of Jesus. Christ is the image and glory of God; we take on the glory of the Lord in the transformation into His likeness.

4) New Testament ecclesiology and eschatology. This "glory" of Christlikeness is the destiny and the "hope" of the Church. We "rejoice in the hope of the glory" of God (Rom.5:2). Christ being revealed in us is "the hope of glory" (Col.1:27). The blessed hope is "the appearing of the glory" of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ (Tit.2:13 Gr.).

The Bible often tells us that we Christians have been called "to His eternal glory" (1 Peter 5:10), or "into His own kingdom and glory" (1 Thess.2:12), or "for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Thess.2:14). Yet, we are called to be like Christ (Luke 6:40). These two are not different callings. Christlikeness is also said to be our "hope": "...we know that when He is revealed, we shall be like Him...And everyone who has this hope in Him..." (1 John 3:2-3).

The transformation into Christ's likeness is, as I see it, a spiritual transformation of our nature and character, which is wrought "by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor.3:18). Elsewhere, Paul speaks of this as the process of Christ being "formed in you" (Galatians 4:19). The "glory" is to be revealed "in us" (Rom.8:18) and is "worked" in us through sufferings (2 Cor.4:17).

The ever-increasing Christlikeness of His people progresses gradually, like a sunrise: "But the path of the righteous is like the light of dawn, that shines brighter and brighter until the full day." (Prov.4:18 NASB). Peter also says that we must allow the prophetic scriptures to be our guide, "until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts" (2 Peter 1:19).

Exactly what the apostles understood this to mean, in terms of the church's experience and destiny, is intriguing to contemplate. In any case, the wording of 2 Corinthians 3:18 has always inclined me to see it as a reference to this same phenomenon.

[jaydam]

Good thoughts, Jay. I can't answer with certainty, but here are some ideas:

In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul seems to see the veil as concealing the glory of God reflected on Moses' face, thus blinding or obscuring onlookers' vision of what they would have seen with the veil removed. They were not wearing the veil, like a blindfold, but the veil worn by Moses stood between their eyes and the reflected glory on Moses' face—thus blinding them to it. They might as well have been wearing it, when it comes to their perception of the glory of God associated with the Old Covenant. The literal veil on his face, thus, corresponded to a metaphorical veil on their minds. From Moses' side of the veil, his appearance was hidden from viewers. From their side of the veil, they were blind to what he had seen and knew from God's revelation to him.

Thanks Steve. So the single veil worked in dual roles.

As for the glory to glory idea, I know there are several interpretations that I have encountered. I lean towards the immediate context here being the passing of the old glory to entry into the new glory - v9.

[dizerner]

Good thoughts, Jay. I can't answer with certainty, but here are some ideas:

In 2 Corinthians 3, Paul seems to see the veil as concealing the glory of God reflected on Moses' face, thus blinding or obscuring onlookers' vision of what they would have seen with the veil removed. They were not wearing the veil, like a blindfold, but the veil worn by Moses stood between their eyes and the reflected glory on Moses' face—thus blinding them to it. They might as well have been wearing it, when it comes to their perception of the glory of God associated with the Old Covenant. The literal veil on his face, thus, corresponded to a metaphorical veil on their minds. From Moses' side of the veil, his appearance was hidden from viewers. From their side of the veil, they were blind to what he had seen and knew from God's revelation to him.

Thanks Steve. So the single veil worked in dual roles.

As for the glory to glory idea, I know there are several interpretations that I have encountered. I lean towards the immediate context here being the passing of the old glory to entry into the new glory - v9.

In a way it could be both/and rather than either/or. We are always on some level of transitioning from Law to Grace, as it works itself out in our lives and we grow in Christ. Certainly Paul speaks of it as an abiding principle and not a one-time past event. Good posts though, and I had the same confusion about this veil at first, not to be confused with the kind of veil like that Tabernacle had that separates, or a veil that blinds, rather more like the veil of a bride that conceals. I think people get the impression the mirror is doing the transforming, which of course the passage does not say; were the mirror Christ, that would make sense. But were the mirror actually us, the transformation we experience by the Spirit is logically prior to our beholding it.

[jaydam]

In a way it could be both/and rather than either/or. We are always on some level of transitioning from Law to Grace, as it works itself out in our lives and we grow in Christ. Certainly Paul speaks of it as an abiding principle and not a one-time past event. Good posts though, and I had the same confusion about this veil at first, not to be confused with the kind of veil like that Tabernacle had that separates, or a veil that blinds, rather more like the veil of a bride that conceals. I think people get the impression the mirror is doing the transforming, which of course the passage does not say; were the mirror Christ, that would make sense. But were the mirror actually us, the transformation we experience by the Spirit is logically prior to our beholding it.

I agree now that we are the mirror rather than looking into a mirror.

The problem that comes to my mind when you speak of an ongoing transition "from Law to Grace" is that I believe Paul is speaking of Mosaic Covenant (ministry of condemnation) vs. New Covenant (ministry of righteousness), and I do not believe our move from one covenant to the other is ongoing, but a one time matter. I don't see how we can be ongoing by degrees in both covenants. I take from Paul that he believes to hold any of the old covenant is to be under the entire thing.

In Christ there is no condemnation, therefore, no ministry of condemnation. Thus, to be in Christ is to be fully moved from (old) glory to (new) glory.

I think it must be an either/or in this case and not a both/and if the topic is as I understand it, the covenants.

[dizerner]

The problem that comes to my mind when you speak of an ongoing transition "from Law to Grace" is that I believe Paul is speaking of Mosaic Covenant (ministry of condemnation) vs. New Covenant (ministry of righteousness), and I do not believe our move from one covenant to the other is ongoing, but a one time matter. I don't see how we can be ongoing by degrees in both covenants. I take from Paul that he believes to hold any of the old covenant is to be under the entire thing.

As Steve pointed out though, on the other side of the coin is the fact that these people were never under Judaism, yet it was written to them. If you get a man saved on the street he goes straight into the new covenant.

In Christ there is no condemnation, therefore, no ministry of condemnation. Thus, to be in Christ is to be fully moved from (old) glory to (new) glory.

We don't always operate in Christ, or there would be no warnings about operating in the flesh. The Law as Romans 7 clearly shows us, can be an operative principle in the life of a born again Christ, becoming a tutor to lead us to a full trust in Christ and a full knowledge of sinfulness.

I think it must be an either/or in this case and not a both/and if the topic is as I understand it, the covenants.

I await your convincing argumentation.

[jaydam]

The problem that comes to my mind when you speak of an ongoing transition "from Law to Grace" is that I believe Paul is speaking of Mosaic Covenant (ministry of condemnation) vs. New Covenant (ministry of righteousness), and I do not believe our move from one covenant to the other is ongoing, but a one time matter. I don't see how we can be ongoing by degrees in both covenants. I take from Paul that he believes to hold any of the old covenant is to be under the entire thing.

As Steve pointed out though, on the other side of the coin is the fact that these people were never under Judaism, yet it was written to them. If you get a man saved on the street he goes straight into the new covenant.

I wasn't going to pick a discussion over it, but since you pointed it out, I believe Steve might be mistaken in his understanding of the word "we" in the immediate context - at least the way I think he meant it. I do not believe it includes the Corinthians, but only Paul and Timothy - who are both being counted as Jews by Paul in this passage.

All the way back to chapter 1, Paul distinguishes himself and Timothy as the "we" to the church in Corinth "you" - 1:6, 7, 8, etc.

Then in chapter 3, "we" Paul and Timothy, is again seen contrasted with "you" the church in Corinth 3:1, 2, 3.

Getting to the immediate context being considered, Paul opens with telling about how the "us" - to be known contextually as Paul and Timothy still - are sufficient ministers of the new covenant, which they ministered to the church in Corinth.

Paul begins to look at the glory of the covenant which he and Timothy are ministering, and in verse 12 says that it is because of how glorious the hope of the new covenant is that he and Timothy - v12 - used boldness of speech, unlike Moses.

Continuing for a moment into chapter 4, Paul's use of "we" continues to refer to himself and Timothy in relation to their ministry of which the church in Corinth was a recipient. This is most clearly seen in 4:4 and 4:12 as Paul again uses "we/us" and you respectively.

Therefore, in context, the "we" is understood to refer to Paul and Timothy. Now to be considered is 3:18 where it says "we all" - a different phrase.

The Greek word is πᾶς and means "each" - and paired with the contextual use of the word "we" as relating to Paul and Timothy would seem to best be understood as meaning in paraphrase, "But we (Paul & Timothy), with unveiled faces, reflecting the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image, from the Old Covenant we were under as Jews, to the New Covenant which we ministered to you."

I don't think you can contextually make Paul's use of "we" at least through chapter 6 be inclusive of the Gentiles at Corinth, but it means directly Paul and Timothy who are being counted as Jews coming out of the old covenant to be ministers of the more glorious new covenant.

Thus, the glory to glory transition is meant to refer specifically to Paul and Timothy, not the audience.

In Christ there is no condemnation, therefore, no ministry of condemnation. Thus, to be in Christ is to be fully moved from (old) glory to (new) glory.

We don't always operate in Christ, or there would be no warnings about operating in the flesh. The Law as Romans 7 clearly shows us, can be an operative principle in the life of a born again Christ, becoming a tutor to lead us to a full trust in Christ and a full knowledge of sinfulness.

Just because we do not operate in Christ, I do not believe that means we are not fully in the new covenant.

I think it must be an either/or in this case and not a both/and if the topic is as I understand it, the covenants.

I await your convincing argumentation.

I don't know how convincing the argument is, but there you have it. I believe, in this case, Paul is speaking of "we" as himself and Timothy who have moved from the glory of one covenant to the next...

[dizerner]

I talked with an older and more experienced believer, and she has rather convinced me my interpretation is maybe not the best.

In regards to mirrors we have two remarkable pictures: The Laver in the OT was made from the women's bronze mirrors, the Laver representing what contains the living and washing water, the bronze representing Law and the mirrors represent self-reflection, looking at our sins against the Law (mirrors also representing the vanity of self). Indeed only Christ fulfilled the Law in his spirit or heart, the bronze external held by the water internally. The other remarkable picture that somewhat parallels both this passage and the original one in 2 Cor. is in James:

3 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man observing his natural face in a mirror; 24 for he observes himself, goes away, and immediately forgets what kind of man he was. 25 But he who looks into the perfect law of liberty and continues in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer of the work, this one will be blessed in what he does.

Again the picture here is, the mirror is the Law and produces self-reflection, an awareness of two things: personal sin, and corresponding grace from God in Christ. This is the purpose of the Law as always described. This seems to fit well with beholding the glory of the Lord as in a mirror: the depiction of Christ in the Word of God and what his work has done for us and why we need it.

But what about the veil and Moses; I realized this also can neatly fit into this scheme. Maybe we have whose face is being veiled all wrong: rather it was God's face that was veiled, and this face is unveiled in Christ, whom Moses was a vivid type of. This fits right in with Paul's expression around that time of "the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" as being the glory we are beholding in the Word, and the Word transforming us, as everywhere it is said to do.

[jaydam]

Maybe we have whose face is being veiled all wrong: rather it was God's face that was veiled, and this face is unveiled in Christ, whom Moses was a vivid type of.

I'm no Greek expert, but from my first year Greek understanding, I believe the unveiled face is possessed by the "we" of verse 18, so it could not be God's face being unveiled.

[dizerner]

Maybe we have whose face is being veiled all wrong: rather it was God's face that was veiled, and this face is unveiled in Christ, whom Moses was a vivid type of.

I'm no Greek expert, but from my first year Greek understanding, I believe the unveiled face is possessed by the "we" of verse 18, so it could not be God's face being unveiled.

Yea, I was just checking that out. Interesting the face is singular. Think about this, all the Israelites standing before Moses, Moses is glowing and puts on his veil.

"We all having the face veiled, no longer beholding the glory of Moses."

Maybe it's a stretch, here's an interlinear if you can parse up the Greek some:

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_corinthians/3-18.htm